Y'know, I really don't want to say I hate this (for a number of reasons I'll go into later), but I'm not at all disappointed you did. Thank you.
I agree with your analysis. As I read it, I kept thinking about the last book I read, The Friday Night Knitting Club: after her snotty comment about the University of Michigan, it's easier to believe this is some rich women writing literary stiff.
But, I can't let go of the dates of this story. I think this supports your analysis. All of these timeframes are points when the class system and bourgeouise are at its highest and right before somegreat social equalizer comes into play. 1960 is when America is at its most prosperous (well, for some people) and before the Civil Rights movement. The character's father is 87 in 1960, meaning he was born in 1873 (the year of the Panic of 1873, a nationwide depression that lasted until 1877). He would have beenone of the Victorian era's masters of the universe in 1900 (when the social structure is at its highest inAmerica and Britain and five years before Marxist revolutionaries start taking on monarchies likeRussia). If his daughter was born the same year, shewould be 27 in 1927 (during Jay Gatsby's era whererich girls don't marry poor boys and two years beforeBlack Tuesday and the Great Depression) and 40 in 1940(before World War II fox holes found upper class men fighting alongside and sometimes being led by common men).
As I mentioned before, I didn't want to say I hated this story for a bunch of reasons. First, it's not some Upper West Side socialite writing this, but a man (Louis Auchincloss, whose profile said he published his first book in 1947and has produced 60 novels since). So I was looking for the ironic portrayal...but I don't think it's there. If you look at the titles of his fiction books on Wikipedia, it lookslike they all are firmly in the VSPoCotR literary subgenre. He made a whole career of it.
One comment he did make was that he wanted to write about a child's frustration and sense of inferiority at a more talented, egocentric parent. But why choose a woman as your narrator? I mean, yes, an older white male writing from the perspective of an inferior woman, what a surprise, but I feel like with all the other short stories out there, this one can't be such a bland miss.
You know, the funny thing is, Auchincloss wrote several non-fiction books as well - one on Edith Wharton and another on Henry James. :)
I guess the other reason I don't want to outright hate this story is that, with Stephen King as the editor, I can't believe he would choose such an unlikeable story. Maybe it's sentiment or false loyalty, but Ifeel like when I listen to his audio CDs, his book On Writing, or even this introduction, it feels as if King is talking directly to me (or you or the reader). Auchincloss' story is so impersonal and chilly. Knowing King's history as a working class person and that he reads something like 80 books a year, it just seems strange. My sense is that he did it as a nod to the older gentleman's writing.
As I read your post, I had to take notes on all the stuff I haven't read. I read only half of Portrait of a Lady and absolutely hated it (all right, all right -she's a virtuous woman who is given money - get to the part where she realizes her marriage is a sham). I think I might have read an Edith Wharton short story or two, but I am embarrassed to admit what a fiction anemic I am and how full of holes my cheesecloth study of literature has become. The last sort of literary thing I've read is MacBeth (last year) and maybe whenI went into my Jane Eyre kick. Otherwise, I'm reading more non-fiction (a biography of Anne Boelyn rightnow), some chick lit, or "reading" audio fiction on This American Life.
But I think it's a sign I need to do more reading. One of my NY's resolutions is to take time to read some of the periodicals King is recommending.
I agree with your analysis. As I read it, I kept thinking about the last book I read, The Friday Night Knitting Club: after her snotty comment about the University of Michigan, it's easier to believe this is some rich women writing literary stiff.
But, I can't let go of the dates of this story. I think this supports your analysis. All of these timeframes are points when the class system and bourgeouise are at its highest and right before somegreat social equalizer comes into play. 1960 is when America is at its most prosperous (well, for some people) and before the Civil Rights movement. The character's father is 87 in 1960, meaning he was born in 1873 (the year of the Panic of 1873, a nationwide depression that lasted until 1877). He would have beenone of the Victorian era's masters of the universe in 1900 (when the social structure is at its highest inAmerica and Britain and five years before Marxist revolutionaries start taking on monarchies likeRussia). If his daughter was born the same year, shewould be 27 in 1927 (during Jay Gatsby's era whererich girls don't marry poor boys and two years beforeBlack Tuesday and the Great Depression) and 40 in 1940(before World War II fox holes found upper class men fighting alongside and sometimes being led by common men).
As I mentioned before, I didn't want to say I hated this story for a bunch of reasons. First, it's not some Upper West Side socialite writing this, but a man (Louis Auchincloss, whose profile said he published his first book in 1947and has produced 60 novels since). So I was looking for the ironic portrayal...but I don't think it's there. If you look at the titles of his fiction books on Wikipedia, it lookslike they all are firmly in the VSPoCotR literary subgenre. He made a whole career of it.
One comment he did make was that he wanted to write about a child's frustration and sense of inferiority at a more talented, egocentric parent. But why choose a woman as your narrator? I mean, yes, an older white male writing from the perspective of an inferior woman, what a surprise, but I feel like with all the other short stories out there, this one can't be such a bland miss.
You know, the funny thing is, Auchincloss wrote several non-fiction books as well - one on Edith Wharton and another on Henry James. :)
I guess the other reason I don't want to outright hate this story is that, with Stephen King as the editor, I can't believe he would choose such an unlikeable story. Maybe it's sentiment or false loyalty, but Ifeel like when I listen to his audio CDs, his book On Writing, or even this introduction, it feels as if King is talking directly to me (or you or the reader). Auchincloss' story is so impersonal and chilly. Knowing King's history as a working class person and that he reads something like 80 books a year, it just seems strange. My sense is that he did it as a nod to the older gentleman's writing.
As I read your post, I had to take notes on all the stuff I haven't read. I read only half of Portrait of a Lady and absolutely hated it (all right, all right -she's a virtuous woman who is given money - get to the part where she realizes her marriage is a sham). I think I might have read an Edith Wharton short story or two, but I am embarrassed to admit what a fiction anemic I am and how full of holes my cheesecloth study of literature has become. The last sort of literary thing I've read is MacBeth (last year) and maybe whenI went into my Jane Eyre kick. Otherwise, I'm reading more non-fiction (a biography of Anne Boelyn rightnow), some chick lit, or "reading" audio fiction on This American Life.
But I think it's a sign I need to do more reading. One of my NY's resolutions is to take time to read some of the periodicals King is recommending.
No comments:
Post a Comment